Rescan Report
Share Report
Copy Report Link
Rescan Report
Share Report
Copy Report Link
Export Report
40/100

OVERALL SCORE

Level 2, Agent-Limited

Priority improvements needed for AI agents
AIDiscoverability38%Agent Easeof Use53%Security& Trust53%GEO, AIO, AEO50%SEO92%Performance47%Accessibility0%
  • AI Discoverability 38 out of 100
  • Agent Ease of Use 53 out of 100
  • Security & Trust 53 out of 100
  • GEO, AIO and AEO 50 out of 100
  • SEO 92 out of 100
  • Performance 47 out of 100
  • Accessibility 0 out of 100

CAPTURED SCREENSHOT

Captured website desktop screenshot

What AI sees of your website

De Telegraaf: Direct het laatste nieuws uit Nederland en buitenland | De Telegraaf favicon

De Telegraaf: Direct het laatste nieuws uit Nederland en buitenland | De Telegraaf

Lees, kijk en luister direct voor het laatste nieuws uit binnen- en buitenland. En ook voor sport, financieel, VROUW, entertainment, lifestyle en meer. Altijd actueel: telegraaf.nl.

Next step

Turn this report into a fix workflow

2 failed checks are ready to move into MCP or CLI remediation. Generate a repair prompt, connect the scanner to your coding agent, or open the integration docs before your next rescan.

Detailed report scores grouped by capability area
MetricScoreStatusPassedFailedWarningEvidence
AI Discoverability
38
Priority fix1662View details
Discoverability
20
Priority fix200
Content Readiness
35
Priority fix1131View details
Bot Access Control
54
Needs work331View details
Agent Ease of Use
53
Needs work210View details
API
67
Needs work100
Google Agentic Browsing
50
Needs work110View details
GEO, AIO and AEO
50
Needs work300
AIO Readiness
Not Applicable
Not Applicable300
SEO
92
Strong900
SEO
92
Strong900
Security & Trust
53
Needs work1000
Security & Trust
53
Needs work1000
Performance
47
Priority fix900
Performance
47
Priority fix900

Prioritized recommendations

Issues ranked by score impact

3 items need attention

AI DiscoverabilityContent ReadinessEstablished

Author attribution

Author attribution is partially implemented.

95 Fail

Needs attention

Author attribution

Failed check
01

Issue

Applicable editorial content has no usable author, creator, publisher, visible byline, or HTML attribution signal.

02

Why it matters

Author attribution helps agents cite content responsibly, assess source credibility, and distinguish editorial pages from anonymous marketing copy.

Check name

Author attribution

Score

5/100

Status

fail

Category

Content Readiness

Maturity

Established

Goal

Identify content authors or publishers for trust and attribution.

Result

Author attribution is partially implemented.

Validation steps

  1. Schema.org attribution

    Editorial content has no Schema.org author, creator, or publisher attribution.

  2. Author identity quality

    No named author or publisher identity could be extracted.

  3. Visible byline parity

    Structured author/publisher names were not found in visible byline text.

  4. HTML attribution support

    No supporting HTML author metadata, rel=author link, or visible byline was found.

Evidence log4 steps · 16 lines
Schema.org attribution [fail]! Editorial content has no Schema.org author, creator, or publisher attribution.INFOSchema.org attributionINFOChecking structured data for author, creator, and publisher contributorsFAILCheck named Schema.org author count actual=0 expected="> 0" authorCount=0 publisherCount=0 namedContributors=0 authors=[] publishers=[] formats=[]FAILNo Schema.org author, creator, or publisher attribution foundAuthor identity quality [fail]! No named author or publisher identity could be extracted.INFOAuthor identity qualityINFOChecking contributors for stable identity signalsFAILCheck identified contributor count actual=0 expected="> 0" namedContributors=0 identifiedContributors=[] unidentifiedContributors=[]FAILNo named contributor identity could be extractedVisible byline parity [fail]! Structured author/publisher names were not found in visible byline text.INFOVisible byline parityINFOComparing structured contributor names with visible byline evidenceFAILCheck visible attribution matches actual=0 expected="> 0 or visible byline present" visibleByline=false bylineCount=0FAILNo visible byline parity foundHTML attribution support [warning]! No supporting HTML author metadata, rel=author link, or visible byline was found.INFOHTML attribution supportINFOChecking meta author, rel=author, and visible byline supportWARNCheck HTML attribution support signals actual=0 expected="> 0" metaAuthor=false relAuthor=false visibleByline=falseWARNNo supporting HTML attribution signal found

AI DiscoverabilityBot Access ControlEmerging recommendation

ai.txt policy

ai.txt policy failed at "Fetch /ai.txt".

82 Fail

Needs attention

ai.txt policy

Failed check
01

Issue

/ai.txt returned HTTP 403.

02

Why it matters

ai.txt is a fragmented emerging convention. It can communicate human-readable AI crawling, training, attribution, restriction, and contact guidance, but it is not a standard access-control mechanism and absence should not be penalized.

Check name

ai.txt policy

Score

18/100

Status

fail

Category

Bot Access Control

Maturity

Emerging recommendation

Goal

Publish an advisory human-readable AI usage policy only when the site intentionally needs one.

Result

ai.txt policy failed at "Fetch /ai.txt".

Validation steps

  1. Fetch /ai.txt

    /ai.txt returned HTTP 403.

  2. Validate transport

    ai.txt appears to be an HTML page or error document rather than a plain-text policy.

  3. Parse ai.txt policy

    Transport validation failed before policy parsing could be trusted.

  4. Validate policy content

    ai.txt does not follow the AI Visibility section model; treating it as non-standard advisory text.

Evidence log4 steps · 18 lines
Fetch /ai.txt [fail]! /ai.txt returned HTTP 403.INFOFetch /ai.txtINFORequesting optional advisory policy file at /ai.txtFAILCompare /ai.txt HTTP response actual=403 expected="2xx when ai.txt is intentionally published; 404/410 means absent optional file" contentType="text/html; charset=UTF-8" length=4549FAIL/ai.txt returned HTTP 403. statusCode=403Validate transport [fail]! ai.txt appears to be an HTML page or error document rather than a plain-text policy.INFOValidate transportINFOChecking ai.txt media type, size, line count, and whether the response looks like plain text contentType="text/html; charset=UTF-8" length=4549 lineCount=90FAILCompare media type to preferred text/plain transport actual="text/html" expected="text/plain preferred; readable text required"FAILai.txt appears to be an HTML page or error document rather than a plain-text policy.Parse ai.txt policy [fail]! Transport validation failed before policy parsing could be trusted.INFOParse ai.txt policyINFODetecting ai.txt convention from bracket sections, frontmatter, headings, and ai.txt context linksINFODetected policy structure convention="unknown-text" sections=[] markdownHeadings=[]WARNCheck AI Visibility required sections actual="missing identity, permissions, restrictions" expected="identity, permissions, and restrictions" missingRecommended=["attribution","contact","content-types"]WARNTransport validation failed before policy parsing could be trusted.Validate policy content [warning]! ai.txt does not follow the AI Visibility section model; treating it as non-standard advisory text.INFOValidate policy contentINFOChecking required section content, permission/restriction language, attribution, contact details, and safety risks convention="unknown-text"INFODetected policy signals hasPermissionLanguage=false hasRestrictionLanguage=false hasTrainingLanguage=false hasAttributionLanguage=false hasContact=falseWARNCheck required and recommended section coverage actual={"missingRequired":["identity","permissions","restrictions"],"missingRecommended":["attribution","contact","content-types"]} expected={"missingRequired":[],"recommendedPresentWhenPossible":true}WARNai.txt does not follow the AI Visibility section model; treating it as non-standard advisory text.

Agent Ease of UseGoogle Agentic BrowsingBrowser audit

Accessibility tree is not well-formed

100 Fail

Check name

Accessibility tree is not well-formed

Score

0/100

Status

fail

Device

desktop

Category

Google Agentic Browsing

Fix guidance

A well-formed [accessibility tree](http://goo.gle/lighthouse-agentic-a11y) helps AI agents to navigate and interact with the page.

Evidence
{
  "description": "A well-formed [accessibility tree](http://goo.gle/lighthouse-agentic-a11y) helps AI agents to navigate and interact with the page."
}

Sign in to see 49 other issues and the full report

Create a free account to unlock every issue, evidence details, exports, and higher free limits.

Email code

Fix with MCP or CLI

Use this report as the handoff into remediation. Generate a coding-agent prompt with the failing checks attached, or jump to the MCP and CLI setup docs before your next rescan.

Score history

Public scan score over time

Public reports for this website origin. Select any point or report link to open that canonical report.

1 reports
Public score history report links
Scan dateScoreReadinessReport
40/100Level 2, Agent-LimitedCurrent report